[ICANN-EU] Re: [ga] Non for profit TLDs - CINICs

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

At 22:11 13/09/00, you wrote:
> > > > >You are right. Do you know if such a registry exists? If not, why 
> do we
> > > > >not set one up and apply for a TLD with ICANN *now*? I'm serious. 
> There
> > > > >would be so many advantages to a cooperative registry. For one it 
> wouldn't
> > > > >make profit. The domains would be as inexpensive as possible. It could
> > > > >limit the number of domains one could hold. It could do its own 
> UDRP :-)
>
> > > > Marc,
> > > > I incorporated two TLD non profit associations for common management
> > > > of the ".sys" and ".wiz" TLDs by the name of .SYS and .WIZ.. (We joke
> > > > at this common interest NICs as "CINIC") These two TLDs correspond
> > > > also to specific addressing semantics:
> > > >
> > > > -  .sys is for registering formats.
> > > >
> > > >     like http://*-schneiders*.sys or http://ibm-.sys allowing the
> > > Schneiders
> > > >     family to freely manage nameservers accepting from:
> > > >           http://marc-shneiders.sys to http://ted-schneiders-Jr.sys
> > > >     and IBM to freely set-up
> > > >          http://ibm-france.sys, http://ibm-uk.sys etc...
> > >
> > >Jefsey, I am not at all an expert on DNS. I doubt, however, that your
> > >system would work with the present "canonical" nameservers, as you seem to
> > >indicate yourself further down. Since it will take a while to change
> > >things, necessarily, I presume, on the RFC level, it is hardly a good idea
> > >to spend $50,000 now to get a TLD(-system) that will not work until 2005.
> >
> > The system works only on the semantic of the second level domain name.
> > It works through pattern matching. Two possibilities:
> >
> > -  the DNs are reserved by the Members, by mails, exactly as today.
> >     the only difference is that they must include a second element in
> >     the requested domain name line. This element includes an encrypted
> >     description of the pattern and serves as a password. The domain
> >     name is validated if the pattern matching is OK. There is strictly
> >     no change in the DNS.
> >
> > -  the filtering is made dynamically at our nameserver level: we just
> >     associate the IP address of the Member's name server with the
> >     pattern. Then the domain name must resolve on the Member's
> >     name server.
>
>So that I understand it, may I put it in my own words? For the zone server
>and other DNS servers a domain is
>*-test-*.sys. So basically it is test.sys. The stuff the owners want to
>put in front or after the name should always have a "-", so DNS knows this
>is not part of the SLD, but really works like a third level domain. So
>there would always have to be "-"'s before and after to indicate where the
>one stops and the other begins. Basically "-" would then be illegal in the
>names themselves. Did I get it somewhat right?

you got the idea. But actually it is pattern matching. It can be anything
like for a product line : SONYaannnnna.sys where a is alpha and n numeric.
We though to use existing reroute mechanisms, but is easier to develop
a small filter module and to adapt to the language and rates to the decisions
of the AG. It might decide to build a rate where AB78.sys, AB67.sys etc...
would be more expensive than http://marc-Schneiders.sys

>Still all nameservers would have to know how to deal with the special case
>of the stuff that is before and after the "-". And it has to know to only
>do this in .sys, as in .com it has not the special meaning your .sys gives
>to it. This would mean rewriting bind for all nameservers that should be
>able to deal with your new TLD. Tell me where I miss something.

This is why I do not want to be too level specific. But the most used way
by very far would probably be that the user's nameserver is strictly standard.
your "-test-" in the zone server allows to make the format entry only once
(in second phase). The user nameserver lists all the full domain names
its autoritative for. But it may use our module to handle "-test-a", "test-b"
etc...

> > In the first possibility (phase) there is nothing realy new except there
> > cannot be conflicts nor cybersquatters.
> >
> > >Moreover, half of what you propose (adding something in front of the
> > >domain name) is already done since DNS was born. Is the other half really
> > >worth the trouble?
> >
> > I was probably unclear with the example to be short. The Domain Name
> > is a regular domain name, but they come in sequence (with a pattern).
> > There is nothing spécial, but for marketing, organization, product lines,
> > VPN it simplifies property, communications and procedure a lot. Also
> > you de facto reserve thousands of DN you do not pay for.
>
>Yes, you can also add something at the end as well. Before is already
>possible.

Let say you contract all the traffic lights automation in Berlin. You
register BERLINTRnnnnn.sys it means that you have secured once for all
from http://berlintr00000.sys to http://berlintr99999.sys for every traffic 
light
Linux box for thousand years (this is what I am working on, large VPNs).

> > > >      This has been documented on the ICANN site before Yokohama (this
> > > >      was proposition #3). The user target spans site and machine 
> systems;
> > > >      local portal chains like mine, product lines, multinational 
> groups,
> > > >      families, NGO with many local sites on different servers, VPN, 
> etc...
> > > >
> > > >      The rules for Membership are simple:
> > > >
> > > >      -  yearly Membership is $ 1000 (to be reviewed by GA
> > > >      -  participation to management cost in proportion to traffic
> > > >      -  UDRP during the 30 first days only and open to TM having
> > > >         registered in class 42 less than 30 days ago. If a TM owner is
> > > >         serious about protecting his TM in that TLD he has 30 days 
> after
> > > >         registering its TM to register it. (The delay extends to 3
> > > month and
> > > >         to every class 42 TM during the bootstrap period)
> > > >      -  commercial Members must have at least 100 DNs in other TLDs
> > > >         according to that format.
> > > >      -  in case of format conflict, the priority goes to the Member 
> having
> > > >         first registered his 100th DN in other TLDs
> > > >      -  to jointly promote the ".sys" TLD (with a monthly award) and
> > > >         actions. The launching action was to donate $10.000 to the
> > > >         @large effort: for 150.000 pros around the world knowing us.
> > >
> > >I find the barier rather high. My idea (which is no more than just an
> > >idea) was one with a much lower level of entry, one that anyone in
> > >the first world in any case, could afford. And firmly within the
> > >present implementation of DNS.
> >
> > Actually the barrier is very low or even free. We are an association: so
> > if a corporation Member has already 100 domain names in other TLDs
> > $ 1000 is very cheap. If this is a family name, we will have a deal make
> > a sub-group managing the family address site. $ 1000 will be rather
> > cheap when divided b y 100 or 1000. They organize the forename
> > adn nicknames allocation. We alredy have a few familly names in line.
> > I note that an URDP would face 100 or 2000 people owning their name.
>
>Sorry, I am not saying your plan is not good. Only that it is
>different. In my idea (born just today, and too late for October 2 ICANN
>deadline) there would be owners of just one (or a few) domains who were
>partners in the cooperative effort. People could join for $10 or maybe
>$25. The yearly registration fee could be very low once things were
>running, maybe even something like $10 for 5 years.
>But of course this would be a TLD catering for a different group of
>customers than yours.

I understand. You asked about non profit cooperative TLDs. This one
is and the funding is partly by Members each one owns a pattern. The
problem with the K$50 is that it is too expensive for word of the month,
so collecting $10 costs you $30. The solution lies wight ULDs. You start
a TLD as an SLD in such a way the users will accept the change.

Anyway I suppose that ICANN's joke will faded away at last one year
from now.

> > > >      The development required is a modification of our nameservers
> > > >      software to accept a default character semantic (still to be
> > > >      finalized). There is no change in the user nameserver software.
> > >
> > >Yes, I would imagine any resolver believes what the nameserver tells
> > >it. But to work globally your sys-named should be used by all nameservers
> > >around. Or do I not understand you correctly?
> >
> > No. Only on tyhe TLD nameserver in second phase to transfer the
> > possibilbty to create domain names directly by the Member. Actually
> > we split the second level in two levels: the pattern handled by the
> > CINIC and the full domain name by the Member's nameserver (all the
> > ibm-xxxxx.sys are handled by IBM's name server). The other levels
> > are not concerned.
>
>But, as I said above, all nameservers on the internet should understand
>that ibm-xxxxx.sys must go to ibm*.sys and not to ibm-fr.sys or
>ibm-nl.sys etc., like it works with ibm-fr.com and ibm-nl.com. Bind has to
>change or it will give NXDOMAIN for all your .sys names.

No. The *.sys is responded by our zone server. Then we pass it to the IBM
name server.

> > > >       The management is extremely limited. The office is ready. The
> > > >       line is ordered.
> > > >
> > > > -  .wiz is a rule oriented system.
> > > >
> > > >      Its purpose is to open a real service on a test basis first and
> > > >      then to be an operational test bed for all technical and legal
> > > >      issues involved.
> > > >
> > > >      We are studying a system where the Members could set
> > > >      up and check the rules dynamically, there would therefore be
> > > >      no management.
> > >
> > >This sounds interesting. I wonder how you avoid that I e.g. would claim an
> > >awful lot of names, if there is no management and it is virtually free, as
> > >you say below.
> >
> > The system is already in use. It is actually very simple (today a simple
> > Perl program for real life tests). In a first period there will be no
> > difference
> > in using it from normal usage. Then you may have a saxon/latin semantic
> > if you want reversing the order of the names. Then we will progressively
> > introduce new features.
> >
> > > >      The purpose of the rules would only be to lead to an URL and
> > > >       the format of the entries would be url compatible, so there
> > > >       would be no change in the DNS.
> > > >
> > > >       http://marc.schneiders.wiz or http://schneiders.marc.wiz
> > > >       or http://father.son.marc.scheneiders.wiz would lead to
> > > >       the same http://marc.venster.nl
> > >
> > >And email?
> >
> > The system resolves to real DNs, hence mails may be either routed
> > in using real (non smart) addresses, or would use smart addresses
> > exactly the same and be resolved with he same resolver. However
> > mails should be resolved more precisely (like filtering on your mail
> > system: an unlimited set of services may be offerd: there are already
> > several ventures in that field. Nothing realy new).
>
>Still, why would we want this? I am perfectly happy with just
>marc.schneiders.wiz. The other order does not seem logical to me. If I
>were a Hungarian I might want schneiders.marc.wiz maybe. But never
>both. It is too confusing for users if both is possible, especially since
>e.g. first and last names are very similar in many languages a lot of the
>time: Gerard Gerard(s). William Williams.

The example is very basic. But let stick to it. If your brother wants to
call you he uses marc.shneider.wiz, if an hungarian wants to call you
he will use shneider.marc.wiz. If a chinese wants to call you: do you
know what he will enter? If a rule has been entered, you do not mind:
he will get at you.. Again there is a very long RFC on its way about that.

In e-commerce I may enter http://cheap.pc.window.2000.wiz to get
an access....

>  > > > > The system would be open
>to Members only and for a fee
> > > >       voted by the GA. The idea is to have it at the lowest cost or
> > > >       free (for some or for all or on choice) so we may study the
> > > >       largest panel of users and of TM/intellectual propriety cases.
> > > >
> > > > I have asked the WIPO questions about the semantic of the URL.
> > >
> > >Don't wait for the answer. I have never received one from them.
> >
> > yeap. But asking shown we did our home work in case of further
> > relations. We are fully OK to go by the UDRP should the word
> > Domain Name be defined in it as they other items concerned by
> > an UDRP. Seems an obvious need : in our case it is a necessity.
>
>If ICANN does not do anything about how the UDRP is now functioning, it
>might very well be the end of ICANN. people will not go on accepting this
>shit (pardon).
>Alternative roots are really not that difficult to set up, not even very
>stable ones. A few big ISP's in the US and a few from Europe and ICANN is
>dead. Then those ISP's could determine which new gTLDs there will be....
>This seems to me a more viable option than the existing alternative roots,
>most of which do not look very serious to me.

You right. This is not because of the people or of the concept, but
because of the business plan. The first thing to set-up is a network of
reliable DNS servers, ie to get the need and the money for it through
something paying for it. Then to have an economical model to make
money out of it. The CINIC concept will be economically sound for
us in a few months.

>  > > > BTW these two TLDs show that the DN concept is to be
>legally > > > defined. In both TLDs the Registry do not know about the DN
> > > > being really used. The owner is free to add and remove: this is
> > >
> > >What third (or higher) level domains are used in the present system is
> > >also free.
> >
> > Yes. We are part of the present domain. But we extend the second
> > domain through semantic (sys) or change the order of the domains
> > and introduce a logic between them in the second case. Nothing
> > realy new: there is an RFC under way (quite complex and
> > structured) about such a project. We think we are better to gi real
> > and progressive rather than too innovative later on.
> >
> > > > freedom of speech and intellectual property. If I chose an URL
> > > > which quotes a famous line, can the author of the line make
> > > > an UDRP? It is well accepted that a line is free for quote, if
> > > > you say who wrote it. If the line is famous everyone is
> > > > supposed to know who wrote it, if it is not how do you know
> > > > if the user known the writer ... billions of lines are produced
> > > > every years....
> > > >
> > > > 1. Unlimited number of by the book TLDs
> > > >
> > > >     In using these two TLDs (different ways) we planned opening an
> > > >     unlimited number of "ULD" ie. TLD-to-be SLDs. Example:
> > > >     ".txu" is the Texas TLD as per the extension of the ISO 3 letter
> > > >     list proposed in 1969 by the Library of Congress. The ULD is
> > > >     ".txu.sys" used to register http://domain_name.txu.sys until
> > > >     a ".TXU CINIC" is created, accepting http://domain_name.txu
> > >
> > >I find this very complicated. Why not have .txu immediately, if it is
> > >something useful (which I think it is not)?
> >
> > May be not fior .txu (yes for Texas) but this is an high demand
> > in some places. The point is that the ICANN asks $ 50.000
> > to test a TLD. We test it for free and in staying fully compliant
> > with the ICANN strategy.
>
>That is really clever indeed, though it would involve a renaming at a
>later stage, this could be done transparently by letting the old txu.sys
>being remapped to the new txu.

True. Actually the transfer would be for three clones as many people
would prefer wearing ".texas". But this names must be cheap and friendly.
the http://cinic.texas site must be something to remember for Texies,
like a real club, and the system must work flawless in the background.

> > > > 2. Worldwide ring of nameservers
> > > >
> > > >      As a non profit association we consider that TLDs may
> > > >      help countries to develop and support local cultures. We
> > > >      want to support regional ULDs, but we want also to develop
> > > >      local top level operations in developing countries to support
> > > >      that TLDs. The idea was to start with the French overseas
> > > >      territories with a nameserver physically installed in each
> > > >      one for a "non stop 24/365 world ring service" providing on
> > > >      the spot training to young local engineers.
> > >
> > >O, please, no, do not put any critical nameservers on little islands in
> > >the Pacific. Doing that is just a polictical statement using something
> > >that is hardly interesting to most people. Sure, I am "proud" that I run a
> > >little nameserver, but I am clever enough not to put it in my apartment on
> > >an ISDN line.
> >
> > I do not agree with that. When you look at the Netmap this is no worse
> > than atcually going to you building.  All in all the intl lines works 
> pretty
> > well. You also find financial helps for this. And I love the challenges!
>
>Sorry, I may not have been clear. My server is co-located, not at home. I
>think we do not want to have critical nameservers for TLD-zones on little
>islands. I don't.

There is no little island, do not be afraid. I will take one: you know about
ARIANE, this is the most secure, telecom controlled, launching pad
in the world. Is that OK with you? The point is to have 24 hours reliable
team able to control servers everywhere they are. I developed a
technology for scores of nameservers being very simply managed. Do
not mind; this is very serious. Investors are not ready to put their own
family money in something unsecure. I don't either.

> > > > >If 5000 people would each "bet" $10, and pledge another $25 when the
> > > > >application is approved, it could be done.
> > > >
> > > > I had not so many people!
> > >
> > >But you would need only 50, isn't it?
> >
> > 100 two TLDs.
> >
> > > > But I had made the amount until yesterday. I suppose now that
> > > > I will go without asking anything more to the ICANN (thx!!!), or
> > > > that some big money will pick my ideas (my/our [*] only protection
> > > > was to make it public today in here and for you to discuss them,
> > > > so it becomes full common knowledge).
> > >
> > >This is not clear to me. Are you going to apply? Did you get the money
> > >together? Or not?
> >
> > I was. My funding went away upset at some mails.
> > I doubt I can find at alternative n time.
>
>Sorry to hear that. Hope you have some luck. I am not really convinced by
>your ideas, but why not let you try it?

Oh! we are. 1250 sites on their way. What went away was
the funding to go either to the press or to the ICANN. They
decided for me... May be sometime we may overcome.

>One final thing I am worried about with all new TLDs and especially yours
>as they are structured differently: Will this not be very confusing for
>ordinary users?

This is an excellent question, and this is why I say that all the
UDRP stuff is absurd. The first thing to do is to consider the
semantic used by the user. You may impose a few ones (the
current domains works well) but not so much. An example are
the international domain names: the Chinese semantic does
not understand "members.icann.org". So the addressing system
must be as much intuitive as possible to the user to avoid
confusion. But being intuitive means to adapt to each cultural
intuition (like for your name by an Hungarian and a Chinese).
Then there are no different structure, but obvious natural
local structures (plus the standard current one).

Fro example http://support.france.ibm.com which is a normal
saxon sequence understood by the current users is not intuitive
to the french user who will better understand
http://support.ibm-france.com

There are hundred ways to tell your product is good. You pay
a pro to help coining a slogan. For your url you should to. You
do not mind being on the net if your are not also in the
people's memory.

To finish please consider the public TLD set (.com, .net.org
and its semantic as a ".default", all others comes as "plug-in"
in addition.

Jefsey